Monday, December 26, 2005
Follow up to BG's 9/11 post
BG has been kind enough to put together a follow up post to address some of the comments and questions raised in the comments to his previous post. I've read some of the information provided in his links and it is very interesting stuff. Check it out! So, once again, may I present BG!
GM
Rather than take my time and yours talking about how I'm in the main stream in so many ways (trauma on 9/11, disbelief, shock, horror, anger, blah, blah), I'll wrap up my appearance on GM Blog, which GM so graciously allowed, with the following:
The following is taken from
http://septembereleventh.org/
We are an action-oriented 9-11 website. Many good websites already exist offering research and analysis of the events of September 11th, 2001. Our purpose is not to duplicate these efforts, nor to prove or disprove what really happened. Rather, our goal is to support the 9-11 truth movement itself, led by the victims' families' efforts to obtain full government accountability for the suspicious and unprecedented intelligence and air defense failures that took place before and during the attacks. What you will find on this site are information and tools designed to help build this movement.
I'm not saying this web site is authoritative or singular. Rather, I think a visitor to this site receives the overall impression in a variety of voices speaking for 9/11 Truth. Here, I think you see the heart and soul of those of us who believe sharing this information is the best hope for getting our Country back, or perhaps making the US what it should be, yet hasn't been in recent history.
GM
Rather than take my time and yours talking about how I'm in the main stream in so many ways (trauma on 9/11, disbelief, shock, horror, anger, blah, blah), I'll wrap up my appearance on GM Blog, which GM so graciously allowed, with the following:
The following is taken from
http://septembereleventh.org/
We are an action-oriented 9-11 website. Many good websites already exist offering research and analysis of the events of September 11th, 2001. Our purpose is not to duplicate these efforts, nor to prove or disprove what really happened. Rather, our goal is to support the 9-11 truth movement itself, led by the victims' families' efforts to obtain full government accountability for the suspicious and unprecedented intelligence and air defense failures that took place before and during the attacks. What you will find on this site are information and tools designed to help build this movement.
I'm not saying this web site is authoritative or singular. Rather, I think a visitor to this site receives the overall impression in a variety of voices speaking for 9/11 Truth. Here, I think you see the heart and soul of those of us who believe sharing this information is the best hope for getting our Country back, or perhaps making the US what it should be, yet hasn't been in recent history.
posted by GodlessMom, 7:38 AM
4 Comments:
BarbaraFromCalifornia said:
Not much to add, but I wanted to wish you and your family a Happy Holiday.
Posted at 12:55 PM
TLP said:
I actually have the 9/11 Commission Report. It's too big and too "everything" to finish. I do believe that the government covered up its own failings and poor intelligence.
I don't know if I have the strength to delve into this stuff.
I don't know if I have the strength to delve into this stuff.
Posted at 3:54 PM
The Lazy Iguana said:
The truth to September 11 was that America was simply not ready for this kind of attack. The air defence system was set up to detect Russian Migs, not domestic airliners.
The SOP for dealing with a hijacking was to let the plane land somewhere, then negotiate with the hijackers. Never before had planes been used as a guided missle.
NORAD looks out, not in. It may look in now, but that is after the fact.
There was no procedure for dealing with airlines used as guided missles. None. Yea, you can scramble fighers but then what? Shoot down all airliners you see? And who gives the order to shoot planes down? The guy reading a story about a goat to a bunch of kids?
In the 1980s, a man in a small plane landed in Red Square, Moscow. Russian radar did not pick that plane up either. In the 1990s, a Mig from Cuba landed in Key West. Planes CAN slip past radar. Granted, these planes were not as large as a jumbo jet - but do you have any idea how cluttered airspace is? There were thousands of jets in the air when the attacks began, there was some confusion over who was hijacked and who was not.
The government is probably covering up some stuff, that is pretty much a given. But to give the government enough credit to mastermind the attacks, the response, and everything else is just insane.
It is possible that a jet, loaded with thousands of pounds of fuel, could do enough damage bring down a tower. Yea, a skyscraper never collapsed because of a fire before - but then again a skyscraper was also never hit by a modern jetliner loaded with fuel either. A paper fire in an office and jet fuel are not the same thing.
Also, the buildings remained standing long enough for most of the people to evacuate safely. That is testament to the design strength of the buildings.
I am not trying to cover up for Bush, I just think you are trying to give the man far too much credit.
The SOP for dealing with a hijacking was to let the plane land somewhere, then negotiate with the hijackers. Never before had planes been used as a guided missle.
NORAD looks out, not in. It may look in now, but that is after the fact.
There was no procedure for dealing with airlines used as guided missles. None. Yea, you can scramble fighers but then what? Shoot down all airliners you see? And who gives the order to shoot planes down? The guy reading a story about a goat to a bunch of kids?
In the 1980s, a man in a small plane landed in Red Square, Moscow. Russian radar did not pick that plane up either. In the 1990s, a Mig from Cuba landed in Key West. Planes CAN slip past radar. Granted, these planes were not as large as a jumbo jet - but do you have any idea how cluttered airspace is? There were thousands of jets in the air when the attacks began, there was some confusion over who was hijacked and who was not.
The government is probably covering up some stuff, that is pretty much a given. But to give the government enough credit to mastermind the attacks, the response, and everything else is just insane.
It is possible that a jet, loaded with thousands of pounds of fuel, could do enough damage bring down a tower. Yea, a skyscraper never collapsed because of a fire before - but then again a skyscraper was also never hit by a modern jetliner loaded with fuel either. A paper fire in an office and jet fuel are not the same thing.
Also, the buildings remained standing long enough for most of the people to evacuate safely. That is testament to the design strength of the buildings.
I am not trying to cover up for Bush, I just think you are trying to give the man far too much credit.
Posted at 10:33 PM
Saur♥Kraut said:
What I said (which is the last comment posted there as of this moment) in the last 'conspiracy' post still stands. And ditto to Lazy Iguana's comment here.
Posted at 7:48 AM